The design and UX isn't done, Rob and Abbie, okkurrrr! 😌
earlybirdgetstheusername's review
Whilst I'm a pro-aug myself, I also happened to be very diplomatic in nature and hence the whole biased approach of the book didn't appeal to me all that much. I was hoping to see both sides of the story and make a decision for myself, but obviously the book is in favor of augmentation. In saying that, Buchanan does present some strong and well researched facts to tip in his favor. Highly recommended for all Deus Ex fans.
mburnamfink's review
4.0
Better Than Human is a slim philosophical volume that lays out Buchanan's positions in favor of human enhancement, and particularly against the arguments of Michael Sandel (next on my reading list). Buchanan takes the line that future biotechnological enhancements to humanity, such as genetic enhancement, expansion of emotional and cognitive capacities by drugs, and cybernetic implants, is not qualitatively different than the traditional ways that humans have enhanced themselves and their environment through technologies like literature and agriculture. This statement is grounding in an idea of evolution as blind and clumsy, and human beings as resilient. There are many areas where evolution has produced "good enough" adaptations, because genotypes are trapped on local peaks of fitness, and any harms that occur after reproduction are not sorted against. The rapid cultural evolution of humans (10,000 years of agriculture, 150 years of industrialization, and now post-industrialism) means that our genetic heritage may not yet be able to reach capabilities within reach of some humans, but out of reach of the species as a whole.
Buchanan takes particular ire at the bad arguments of bioconservatives (Kass, Fukuyama, Sandel), in particular for a weak understanding of the facts of evolution and biology, for assuming that an eternal "human nature" exactly matches early 21st century Republican positions on the family and bioethics, and for raising issues of concern that do not rise to the level of a persuasive argument. Buchanan acknowledges that no development is risk free, but that a conscious choice to engage with the complexities of enhancement technologies and their public risks and benefits is likelier to produce positive outcomes than the existing system, which allows access only through the creation of new diseases, and may be most aggressively pursued by countries with weak ethical governance regimes.
In full candor, I'm personally aligned with Buchanan's position. I agree with his counter to the bioconservatives, but I'm not sure that his version of evolution and the "good" of enhancing human capacities is any less of a "just-so" story than what he argues against.
Buchanan takes particular ire at the bad arguments of bioconservatives (Kass, Fukuyama, Sandel), in particular for a weak understanding of the facts of evolution and biology, for assuming that an eternal "human nature" exactly matches early 21st century Republican positions on the family and bioethics, and for raising issues of concern that do not rise to the level of a persuasive argument. Buchanan acknowledges that no development is risk free, but that a conscious choice to engage with the complexities of enhancement technologies and their public risks and benefits is likelier to produce positive outcomes than the existing system, which allows access only through the creation of new diseases, and may be most aggressively pursued by countries with weak ethical governance regimes.
In full candor, I'm personally aligned with Buchanan's position. I agree with his counter to the bioconservatives, but I'm not sure that his version of evolution and the "good" of enhancing human capacities is any less of a "just-so" story than what he argues against.
bb70's review
5.0
A balanced and in-depth look at the possibilities, dangers, and above all the ethical questions surrounding bio-medical enhancements.
More...